Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Train burglaries in LA

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 652 posts

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#211

Post by thinkingemote »

buran77 wrote: post #183
mngnt wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cause is the same as it always has been: it is easier for some people to get to the desired standard of living by stealing/other crime than by working. Why crime us going up? Because of higher desired standard (every body needs an iPhone, brand name shoes and hats), more difficulty with earning a wage (largely, difficulty getting a job at all) and decreased difficulty in crime (defunding police, more aesily avail…

When risking getting caught stealing is more attractive than working then it's safe to say the working opportunities for those people aren't worth almost anything. People take the easier option. You choose "lock your trains well" despite knowing the answer will be "crack those locks well" because it was the easy answer. The view is simple. Eventually the train will be a rolling mountain of steel protected by an army.…

These types of crimes are generally opportunistic. Opportunistic crimes are committed by people who literally don't think of any future, they don't see any risk, only the chance of a reward. Prison is not on their mind. Similar types of crime would be most house burglaries where entrance is easy, pick pocketing and street mugging.

For house burglary the way to deter opportunistic criminals is to harden down the house just a little bit. Lock doors, close windows.

Often drugs is the driving factor. I notice that out of 207 comments in this thread, only 4 including this one mention drugs.

(I used to work in a criminology research office)

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#212

Post by DocTomoe »

savolai wrote: post #186
mngnt wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cause is the same as it always has been: it is easier for some people to get to the desired standard of living by stealing/other crime than by working. Why crime us going up? Because of higher desired standard (every body needs an iPhone, brand name shoes and hats), more difficulty with earning a wage (largely, difficulty getting a job at all) and decreased difficulty in crime (defunding police, more aesily avail…

I've seen how tricky participating in society with a cheap android phone can get. Your memory runs out all the time when you try to have apps critical for everyday life, and your privacy is sold to highest bidder. Everything takes more time and is less reliable. Until we as a society can honestly look at what reasonable amount of well being in information societies looks like, it's tricky to tell those with less what…

I've been using cheap (~150 Euros) chinese Android phones for years now. I have not experienced memory running out (my current one has some 256 GB, I think), and privacy selling is a problem caused by apps, not by the hardware - you'd be surprised the amount of info your average iOS app sells.

This Android vs. iOS thing is not about technical capabilities, it's about elitism - and elitism always breeds jealousy, and thus thievery. Lao Tse knew this in 500 BC: "By not prizing goods hard to get, you will cause the people to cease from robbing and stealing."

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#213

Post by kqr »

zorpner wrote: post #172
snowgrove wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right to protect oneself and one’s property goes at least as far back as the Code of Hammurabi. Every ancient civilization from Babylon to Tenochtitlan had some variation of this idea. It is practically the definition of civilization itself.

The idea that an individual has "[the] right to protect oneself and one’s property" is fundamentally inconsistent with the existence of slavery throughout most of humanity's history.

It's not, though. The Roman idea of protecting oneself and one's property extended to one's slaves (which counted as property).

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#214

Post by paganel »

alkonaut wrote: post #150
paganel wrote: post #100

That's one of the main reasons why driverless lorries will never be a thing. Unless you accompany each one of them by a weaponised mini-drone, Robocop-style, that is.

What difference would a driver do? A driver is instructed to not interefere if robbed. The difference I suppose is that what would otherwise be a robbery could be a mere burglary which could have less legal risk as well as less risk of violence (In the case a driver interferes, against his instructions)

It won't be just "one" driver, it would more of them, as in the lorries are usually stopped where other lorries are also stopped (at lorry-specific parking spots, for example) and as such it would be harder for the robbers to confront an "united" (for lack of a better word) pack of drivers. Granted, robberies (and even murders [1]) still happen in those circumstances, too, but give the robbers unattended merchandise sitting by the roadside and then see what will happen.

[1] https://www.digi24.ro/stiri/externe/mapamond/au-fost-arestat...

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#215

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

oefrha wrote: post #196
buran77 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When risking getting caught stealing is more attractive than working then it's safe to say the working opportunities for those people aren't worth almost anything. People take the easier option. You choose "lock your trains well" despite knowing the answer will be "crack those locks well" because it was the easy answer. The view is simple. Eventually the train will be a rolling mountain of steel protected by an army.…

> When risking getting caught stealing is more attractive than working then it's safe to say the working opportunities for those people aren't worth almost anything. That assumes thieves are rational actors capable of assessing risks at least somewhat accurately. Often times (the vast majority of times, even) they are not. It's also worth bringing up that certain American subcultures glorify criminals. The criminal l…

It probably is not the main driver, but it is hard to discount it as a factor. Another interesting archetype is one man going solo against a corrupt system ( usually guns are involved ). You could reasonably argue that US populace is conditioned for it and then people are all surprised when people actually act out on those early imprints.

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#216

Post by sgjohnson »

Z0rr0 wrote: post #140
rrdharan wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a silly and needlessly anti-American framing. There’s plenty of high profile theft in Europe - more in fact, since the security is so lax: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/world/europe/Picasso-and-... European “security” has also given us gems like the Brussels and Manchester arena bombings. I don’t know why people in glass houses insist on throwing so many stones.

You are confusing high profile art theft in Europe with low profile UPS theft in the US. The trains are clearly being robbed out of desperation by the poorest citizens. If those citizens lived in the EU, they would have free healthcare, free education, unemployment subsidies and housing. And so they would not be forced to steal our packages.

Nobody is "forced" to steal packages.

"The trains are clearly being robbed out of desperation by the poorest citizens." I don't think that's true. I think they are being robbed because it's easy to do so, with a low risk for any consequences. Similarly as to why shoplifting in LA is up.

Start shooting at the thieves and see how fast the train robbery trend reverses.

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#217

Post by KSteffensen »

gonehome wrote: post #178
baby wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same thing has been happening in SF with homelessness. A lot of people think they should go to prison or be displaced somewhere else. It’s like refusing to accept that there’s a root cause.

Arguably SF’s lack of police response enables continued drug abuse and homelessness. See: https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2021/rescuing-jessica-s... This person has no interest in treatment. They want to do drugs and take advantage of what’s provided to keep doing that. You can’t fix that with hotels. You either need to require treatment or imprison (paired with arresting dealers). On the more progressive end, m…

> Arguably SF’s lack of police response enables continued drug abuse and homelessness.

You want to arrest people for being homeless?

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#218

Post by konschubert »

computerfriend wrote: post #146
zo1 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. If you prevent this one, some people will stop, whilst others will just find something else to steal elsewhere. It's like a big game of wack-a-mole. I'd much rather we arrest them so they can be rehabilitated or helped. Which is a separate discussion, but there have to be consequences. Sometimes it's too late to help them and we just need to stem the damage they do to society and other people that are inn…

> I'd much rather we arrest them so they can be rehabilitated or helped. This is not what happens when people are arrested.

That's why OP said: > Which is a separate discussion

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#219

Post by kqr »

snowgrove wrote: post #161
kqr wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone should have the right to protect themselves and their property. To be clear, this is a political ideal of the Roman Empire that has influenced much of modern civlisation, it's not an inevitable state of humanity.

The right to protect oneself and one’s property goes at least as far back as the Code of Hammurabi. Every ancient civilization from Babylon to Tenochtitlan had some variation of this idea. It is practically the definition of civilization itself.

But unless I've misunderstood Graeber, the idea entered modern jurisprudence and took its recogniseable form from the Roman Empire. In other words, it either looked considerably different in civilisations like Babylon and Tenochtitian, or there's a historic gap of weaker property enforcement between those civilisations and ours.

Re: Train burglaries in LA

#220

Post by sgjohnson »

yed wrote: post #54
fblp wrote: post #12

Sigh - Any resourced and competent police or security force should be able to catch or deter thieves that are stealing packages from the same location . Additionally, mail theft laws which include prison as a consequence should be extended to package thefts if they don't already cover them.

Looks like it's already a federal crime of it's own with possible prison time: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1991

IANAL, but States are not "within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States"

In this context "the United States" means the federal government. States are also within the jurisdiction of the state government, and therefore not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States.

This is the exact same reason why the US president can only pardon federal crimes.

Post reply on HN